plotz

Well, we don't call it College over here but in Germany its basically the same as in the rest of Europe (ref KerikBalm's post ). I'm a post-grad for some years now - B.A. Eastern Asian Economics, Management & Politics - University of Bochum, Germany and Tongji University, Shanghai, China ; 2009 - MSc Management and Economics - University of Bochum, Germany ; 2011 I might add a PhD some time, when I find a topic that will keep me interested for a long enough time.

@Korizon: Though right now the poll results support your reasoning, most people I know have paired Intel CPUs with ATI/AMD GPUs. CPU-wise my personal impression is that Intel offers a much wider range of products catering to different budgets (Pentium G to i3, i5, i7 to Xeon CPUs that nowadays are also very nice for gaming PCs), implying people will also hunt for different budgets of GPUs.

Basically, KerikBalm is right, but as always, it highly depends on your craft. Regarding the OP's questions: - You can stick to two or more kinds of engines (or just use Rapiers for practice, though these still make your life too easy, imho). For highly efficient designs, I recently abandoned R.A.P.I.E.Rs altogether. For a 30t craft, two turbojets paired with two LV-Ns are always sufficient. You can make do with a single turbojet until around 27 tons (using high lift wings), though. - My last two sentences from above also show the impact the engine layout has on the ascent profile: Two turbojets usually deliver a TWR that allows for a quick 20 degree climb. A single turbo is much slower but may be equally efficient (low thrust in low atmosphere = low fuel consumption + only a single engine + less weight) --> 7-12° climb angle. - When dealing with moderate TWRs Profiles for ascent from my experience should always include a sea-level acceleration phase to at least 250m/s (for the ram-effect) and another acceleration phase at 10kms (Turbojet) or 12kms (Rapier). When parts start to overheat, do not adjust thrust but increase the angle of attack to climb more quickly. - Small SSTOs with a Rapier or a Turbojet + a few of those small orange radial engines can be around 8tons and thus have tremendously high TWRs. Just lift off, at 250m/s pull up to 40° and reduce thrust until your acceleration is around 10m/s. When at 7500m, revert to full throttle, slowly reduce AoA until you hit 1300 (Turbojet) or 1400 m/s (Rapier) and climb out at the edge of overheating. - When acceleration comes to a halt with turbojets, additionally switch on your LV-N or LF-O engines until flameout. For Rapiers, switch to closed cycle as soon as you begin to lose speed. Hope this helps. If you need any example craft designs for ascent profiles, just write me a PM. I have some simple ones in my crate .

Yep. Also, the K-Prize challenge thread shows many, many working examples. Small tutorial (deliberately without pictures): A simple blueprint (no payload) from back to front, in order of construction sections: - Hull: 1 Rapier, 1 1k battery, 2 "long" adapters Mk2-1.25m, 1 short mk2 liquid fuel tank in between these two, 1 mk1 inline cockpit, 1 shock cone intake. - Sides: 2 delta wings, 4 elevon #1 control surfaces attached to the trailing edge, 2 airbrakes mounted to the top, 2 moving winglets. - undercarriage: three small landing gears, two below the wings, 1 slightly clipped into the hull (aim for a few degrees of nose-up pitch). Optional: 1 1x6 solar panel with "hard-casing". - top: small delta wing + 1 elevon #1 as rudder. optional: small antenna Tweaks: - unlock steering for front gear, set brake power for rear landing gears to 30/30 - inner elevons of main wing and front winglets: yaw: no; roll: no; pitch: yes; - outer elevons of main wing: yaw: no; roll: yes; pitch: no - rudder elevon: yaw: yes; roll: no; pitch: no Action Group: #1: toggle intake Further instructions: put the CoL slightly behind the CoM (can be relatively far behind it, but does not have to). Rear landing gears should be only slightly behind the CoM Flying instructions: You will probably end up with an initial TWR slightly below 1, so: Take-off, level at 200m altitude or below until you reach at least 250m/s, then slowly pitch up to a degree where you can still slowly gain speed whilst climbing. Do so until 10,000ms, level off. Gain speed until >800m/s, pull up to around 10 degrees. If parts start to overheat, pull up a bit and try to climb more quickly. Stay in air breathing mode as long as you gain speed, only switch to closed cycle when you cannot accelerate anymore (target terminal air breathing speed: >1400 m/s). Use action group #1 to switch mode by closing the intake. Pull up to ~30 degrees until apoapsis hits 72kms (for safety margin). Set SAS to "prograde" to minimize drag. Circularize as usual (prograde burn via SAS can be helpful). checklist prior to deorbiting:open intake, manually switch mode for rapier to air breathing. Transfer any fuel and oxidiser to the tank in the front. You can already click the brake button to deploy the airbrakes. retract solar panels, if extended. de-orbit by aiming for a periapsis of ~10,000m around 30 degrees behindKSC. Land safely .

OK, something from my side once again: The uninspiringly named "Twin Turbo SSTO Planetoid Edition" did its second flight today. Complete album: Summary: - Roughly 26 Tons incl. payload - Payload for this mission: A science probe of 1.4tons, two ion thrusters, 9xxx m/s delta-V - Two turbojets - Two NERVAs - one Kerbal Mission profile: - this time (as suggested here) a relatively quick and steep climbout after runway, no real leveling, slight corrections at 10kms - parking orbit: 71x74 kms - orbital insertion burn of roughly 900m/s to the Mun - payload drop-off, the probe completed the orbit on its own - retroburn to 46.000m periapsis - three aerobraking circles at Kerbin: from 12.000kms to 900kms to 74kms apoapsis height. Turn three was the final re-entry. - no pilot precision award . My orbit was a bit inclined and the craft started to tumble on the wrong side of the planet. At least I was lucky enough to find a little Motu to land on after I regained control .

I didn't mean to patronize you . I just found that keeping the plane at sea level for ~30 seconds results in immense fuel savings (for my lame ducks at least) and a much quicker ascent afterwards, as the TWR receives a big boost due to ram effects. Will post a twin-turbo/twin nuke spaceplane later when I get home from work that does the trick and weight-wise plays in the same league as your bird .

That whole lab thing completely flew past me. So maybe I should put some of them back to orbit, Mun, Minmus now... Pre 1.0 they were a bit meaningless, as it was easier to just shoot a Kerbal to a body and back...

Congratulations to your premiere regarding SSTO spaceplanes (if I read your post correctly) and a nice concept for the airbrakes. Did you consider just leaving the turbojets out of the equation? You should be able to get the same cargo into orbit with much less fuel and weight (and costs ) with twin rapiers only. This will be a slightly less sporty plane and require you two level off twice during ascent: Just after runway to get the ram-effect going and then most practically at ~10-12kms to use maximum thrust to accelerate to >1100m/s. After that, climb as shallow as you can without killing any parts. It looks like your ascent profile was relatively steep anyway (800m/s at 22km/s is roughly 500m/s short of average speeds found in this thread). Looking forward to your next submission !

Btw: The DC-10 in your picture does not have a "larger" engine on top of the fuselage, but three CF6-6D / -50 powerplants rated at exactly the same net-thrust. The bigger cylindrical shape is for air intake reasons. For another interesting spin on Tri-Engine aircraft, take a look at the TriStar design which incorporated an S-Duct to feed air to engine #3.

Hello everyone, for quite a while I have been wondering how people manage to build nice and sleek (and quick) boats in KSP. My own attempts so far usually stall at around 5 m/s in the Great Kerbal Seas. Is there any guide or advice on how to make things float in KSP? Thanks!

Okay. I will look into it. Maybe this will see another challenger rising . Thanks for the heads-up!

Except for the missing T-Fuselage, this craft could have also been named KAe 146 . Nice one though, take a rep .

I have a basic 1.02 related question for this challenge... I have not gotten as far as to try out mining. So: Is refuelling through mining possible on Kerbin (=are there abundant ore deposits around)? That would open up some very interesting possibilities for the circumnavigation .

Then the parachute will do it anyways.

Ok, that made me think enough to stop work on my heavy entry. Here's the Lorry #19, waiting for your download. It follows my interpretation that a craft has to come to a full stop at the end of the runway. - At 15,445 kgs it's heavy. - Four wheels - Two Winglets - Single Parachute Command instructions: - stage boosters (S1) until fuel runs out - stage parachute (S0) - when at less than 5m/s, apply brakes for a full stop

Ok, good point. That would make no sense, as the parachutes hopefully slow it down to zero .

I have interpreted this challenge as counting towards the "F3" mission top speed.

Question: Must not leave the runway = it has to stop there at the end of the run? Edit: That somehow explained itself using the formula

I usually try to assemble my first station during a "build a new manned station in orbit around Kerbin" and in 1.0.2 "rendezvous..." or "dock two vessels in orbit around Kerbin" missions. Required tech: - RCS (not required for station core, but to attach future expansions) - Docking ports (resource transfer) - Electricity (solar panels to keep the station going) - The OCTO drone core is imho a good asset (gives you SAS to prevent rotation of the station) That's the bare minimum for a working station. Hints: - I like to start out with a small core (can be around 3-4t) that has at least 3 docking ports for expansion but as few parts as possible. - To reduce junk, separate your circularizing stage after the burn. If you include a probe core with that, you can crash it to Kerbin, adding chutes also allows for recovery and reusability. This prevents unnecessary debris (de-orbit) and reduces part count (separation of final stage). Later launches can be equipped with a single drone core BELOW the payload. So you only have to maintain a single one at the station (again: fewer parts). - Fuel supply can be ensured by bringing up e.g. a big orange tank later and refuelling it with Spaceplanes or couriers that are only docked temporarily. - More advanced designs may feature a few return capsules (one-off use) and a single transfer vehicle for Munar/Minmus missions (reusable). As this doesn't require any chutes, heat shields,... it can be much lighter. Core checklist: Must: - Batteries - Solar Panels (I use at least 4 of them, slightly angled in every direction to prevent blackouts). Alternately use a single solar sail - Docking ports - Antenna (for missions; nice 2 have if you want to EVA kerbals and do reports "in space just above [biome]" - Drone core Nice to have: - Habitation or a lab for kerbals - RCS tanks (depending on the station's initial purpose) - Fuel tanks (depending on the station's initial purpose) - Return capsules - Lighting to illuminate the station and especially it's docking ports --> easier docking If you want me to, I can post one or two very easy and basic designs that are also quite lightweight, thus easy to get into orbit.

I hope it is OK to start a new post for a new entry. I am just having a lot of fun with the new and harder SSTO "rules" of v1.0. The K-21 managed to do some more orbits and landing just fine (no parts lost), but has been superceded by another craft now: The Kerthrop RDP-29 (Reverse Delta Plane, these Kerbals seem to abbreviate everything). Highlights: - Comes complete with a set of intakes for efficient R.A.P.I.E.R. burns up to 26km and above - Enough fuel for 75km orbit + 600dV leeway - Cockpit H.U.D: Now working three out of five times! - Ailerons that (usually) do not come off! - Standard 48h warranty promises are currently pending. Should be eligible for the Advanced Piloting Precision Award, but probably not for the "smallest craft" one (weighs 8.47 metric tons in take-off to orbit configuration). Proof of orbit: Little sunbath for the batteries prior to descent on the night side of Kerbin We have just left our cruising altitude of 72.000 meters. Jeb is slowly waking up again. Darn, too short once again (~80kms too early) Short final. Jeb is anxiously looking for an ashtray to hide his "orbital cigar" in. Surprinsingly, touchdown is smooth and occurs on the third set of piano keys. Airbrakes are deployed and our craft is ready to turn into the SPH main building for a refueling stop again!

Some underpaid paralegals are investigating your matter as we speak!

Well.. I have sort of an entry which was invalidated by my impatience. Lost both front Canards (1 on ascent at ~26km, 1 on descent because of timewarp) due to impatience. Will return with more patience, though landing performance was not too bad. Meanwhile, here's the very basic Kerboyan Kerbowitsch K-21 Interceptor "Space Edition" . 80x82km orbit with just >600m/s dV left, enough to dock and move on elsewhere . I should add a docking port and RCS then. Vessel highlights: - Sleek appearance, artfully plagiated by Kerbal knockoff engineers (59 years later, though). - State-of-the-Art R.A.P.I.E.R technology - Attitude-neutral Airbrakes and Spoilers (flaps on trailing edges counteract each other) - Built to order interiors by Kerboyan Kerbowtisch individual dept. - 48h money back warranty (void if engine was started) Dude, where's my c(an)ar(d)? Apoapsis and Periapsis Reentry - way too early, I need to fiddle with the Periapsis height and location K-21 on short final for RWY09, cleared to land! Right in the middle... well, sort of. Mission stats

That's exactly how I got past. Rover BoM: - 3-4 units of every science container that is available, - 1 small tank, you can drain it of oxidizer - 1 jet engine, - 1 mk1 cockpit, - 1 intake, - 1 antenna - and maybe a few batteries. - Use a wide track tricycle landing gear, clipped far enough into the fuselage to allow surface sampling or EVA reports "from VAB/Crawlerway..." without leaving the cockpit ladder. - Limit thrust to 30% - and add a pair of elevons angled downwards to act as spoilers for safety (no accidental takeoff). Mission description: Taxi around the complex, activate experiments, stop every now and then for EVAs and maybe surface samples and return to runway when craft science tools are used up. Total cost of mission: Less than 2 units of LF. Yield per mission (excluding samples): 45+ science. Repeat until satisfied . Another hint: Go for electricity and the SAS probe core ASAP and use this for the Mun mission. Hope this helps .

- that eluded me. Sadly, the module is in space for some days game time now. Guess I am going to just launch it again then. The other one is at least guaranteed to produce a spectacular fireball across Kerbin's sky. Thanks for pointing this out, Harry and Octa!

Greetings, fellow Kerbals! After quite a few months of reading articles and posts on this forum, I decided to finally register here. I have been playing KSP since a year or so and finally gotten around to learning the "fine arts" of this game: Efficient SSTO design (w/o R.A.P.I.E.Rs ), station building, docking. My question revolves around the latter two aspects. I've got a nice little station in orbit around Kerbin (career mode). Docking and undocking various vessels has not caused any problems yet. However, I am using the Station Science mod. Thus I sent up a vessel consisting of the Mod's lab and two experiments (plant growth and prograde kuarqs) that are DOCKED with their small return vessels. Now the game will not let me undock these vessels and only offers me the "control from here" option, when I right-click the docking ports (any side). The ports are aligned OK, all vessels have command modules, power,... . How do I get these to undock now? I've attached a screenshot. Any help is greatly appreciated. The KSS is bound to be extended and docking ports are in high demand . Thanks!